Mirrorless or EVIL Cameras

This is a discussion on Mirrorless or EVIL Cameras within Gadgets, Computers & Software, part of the Shifting gears category; Originally Posted by typeOnegative
The winner in terms of numbers will shift back to Canon or Nikon even in this ...

The winner in terms of numbers will shift back to Canon or Nikon even in this space as long as they see to it that their DSLR lenses can be used on an EVIL body.

Hmm, I too used to believe that. After using the EVIL camera for a month, I seriously doubt it. Using the EVIL camera is so convenient, I have just left my dSLR and lenses alone. My 12-60mm lens itself is bigger than the EVIL camera.

It just doesn't make sense to lug around all the legacy lenses when you have a very compact package that can be taken anywhere.

Hmm, I too used to believe that. After using the EVIL camera for a month, I seriously doubt it. Using the EVIL camera is so convenient, I have just left my dSLR and lenses alone. My 12-60mm lens itself is bigger than the EVIL camera.

It just doesn't make sense to lug around all the legacy lenses when you have a very compact package that can be taken anywhere.

What I was saying Samurai is that the leader in the EVIL space could be Nikon and Canon once again. Not that "It makes sense to lug around the legacy lenses."

Besides there would be people like me who will be that small minority of people who would actually find the MFT / EVIL a pain to hold and compose with. Its a question of preference and while I see a large jump in the number of people who own EVIL cameras, the number of people who own and use DSLRs will not die down overnight.

Besides there would be people like me who will be that small minority of people who would actually find the MFT / EVIL a pain to hold and compose with. Its a question of preference and while I see a large jump in the number of people who own EVIL cameras, the number of people who own and use DSLRs will not die down overnight.

If you see the picture of me holding my D90 in the DSLR thread, you will notice that I have big hands. Tried the NEX-5 and 3 and could not hold them at all. In fact I have started finding the HS10 puny as well.

Sony has again used its backside-illuminated Exmor R CMOS sensor instead of CCD, Bionz image processor, and a Sony G lens (tele lense) to try to solve two of the most common complaints about compact cameras: shooting performance and low-light photo quality. This time around they're in the Cyber-shot DSC-HX5V, a compact wide-angle megazoom.

I was going through your thread and did think that the photos are taken from some wide angle lens. Don't you think the vertical distortion is quite a lot from this lens?

I am not sure what vertical distortion you are referring to, can you point out the image?

Like any super-wide lens, there will be geometric distortions. Therefore, it is always software corrected. The JPGs gets corrected in-camera by the firmware. The raw files will have the lens distortion data encoded in by the camera. This data is then used by the raw converter like ACR to correct that distortion. If you saw quite a lot of distortion even after that, then either ACR or the camera didn't do its job.

On the other hand, you could be mistaking fish-eye effect as distortion. By moving close up with a wide angle lens, one can achieve desirable level of fish-eye effect. If one doesn't want it, one can move back and zoom to a higher focal length. This effect is only possible in very low focal lengths. It is up to the sense of composition of the photographer. What is good fish-eye effect for me, may be a lot of distortion for you. Whatever fish-eye effect in my shots are not by accident, I composed it that way.

I am not sure what vertical distortion you are referring to, can you point out the image?

On the other hand, you could be mistaking fish-eye effect as distortion. By moving close up with a wide angle lens, one can achieve desirable level of fish-eye effect. If one doesn't want it, one can move back and zoom to a higher focal length.

Samurai you are exactly getting what he has pointed to and I felt the same.But I do not agree to justification provided it is not a composition problem by stepping back you are not going to get the same view.

Smaller the focal length more is the perspective distortion so in terms of Angle of view 10mm on APS-C may be same as 16mm on FF but the perspective distortion is more in 10mm. This is the limitation for which people buy Full frame body instead of APS-C sensor
And this may be the reason for which many people will prefer NEX , NX or DSLR over micro 4/3.

However barring the ultra wide angle M4/3 is good for all other cases.

Samurai you are exactly getting what he has pointed to and I felt the same.But I do not agree to justification provided it is not a composition problem by stepping back you are not going to get the same view.

My lens not exactly an ultra-wide lens. The effective FL is 18-36mm. I have read multiple professional reviews on this specialist lens before I took the plunge. I believe it is my composition rather than lens distortion.